Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine

• Overview
• Bike Forum
• Chat Forum
• For Sale
• Wanted
• Forum Help
• Classified Rules

Bike Forum

1. DarkIgor - Member

   This might sound daft but are the maximum heart rate formulas a guide to what heart rate you shouldn't exceed or are they estimates of the maximum you can achieve.

   e.g. 220 - 37 (my age) = 183

   However, on the turbo trainer I can get my heart rate up to 200 for around a minute fairly repeatably.

   Should I reset my target zones based on the Max HR I can achieve or should I not let my HR get so high?

   (I realise I should get out and ride but I'm injured at the minute so I've got too much time to think about these things and the trainer is the only option)

   Posted 2 years ago #
2. beinbhan - Member

   The 220 less age max heart rate doesn't mean a thing you can't get a heart rate that you shouldn't exceed your body won't let you, you will throw up first

   Posted 2 years ago #
3. Ed2001 - Member

   Forget 220- age it is an utter waste of time. Should you reset your zones using your max heart rate that you can achieve. YES

   Posted 2 years ago #
4. Ed2001 - Member

   BTW I would do a proper test, your max is not 200 if you can maintain it for a minute.

   Posted 2 years ago #
5. Ed2001 - Member

   max heart rate test would go something like this
   warm up 15 mins
   Then at cadence 80 + increase your effort by 10% every 2-3 mins ( shifting to next gear
   Continue increasing untill you can go no faster then GET OUT OF THE SADDLE AND SPRINT probably 10-20 seconds( if more you probably weren't going hard or fast enough)
   When you have stopped seeing stars and feeling less like puking check your max heart rate.

   Posted 2 years ago #
6. epicyclo - Member

   As an older rider, this is something that concerns me. The calculated rate seems to have no connection with what I can actually get up to.

   Seeing as I don't want my body to be found in a ditch sometime (my wife would kill me), I am careful to keep the rate down. So should/can I adjust my 75% rate to the maximum I have seen on the HR monitor?

   Posted 2 years ago #
7. MikeWW - Member

   I don't know what you mean by older. I'm 47 and max HR I've had is 188(suspect its actually a bit higher) I'll regular train and push up to 175-180. Can't think why you would limit yourself to such a low percentage when you want to be over 80% even for zone 4 training

   Posted 2 years ago #
8. Strangelove - Member

   Forget 220- age it is an utter waste of time

   
   I really hope that is true. I've just started training with my HR monitor again and i quite often get into the 'OMG you are going to die' zone.
   I think I will leave the monitor behind stop worrying about it and just ride

   Posted 2 years ago #
9. epicyclo - Member

   MikeWW - Member
   I don't know what you mean by older....Can't think why you would limit yourself to such a low percentage when you want to be over 80% even for zone 4 training

   
   65

   I can get up to 180 but try to avoid that because the black spots start appearing in my vision.

   If I keep under the 75% rate (apart from brief spurts) I can ride for 24 hours. No idea what zone 4 training is - I'm just trying to make sure I don't keel over

   Posted 2 years ago #
10. Ti29er - Member

    The most I've ever seen was 181 after being at altitude for a week, aged 44.
    I keep it below 173.
    Which is about 220 minus my age.

    Posted 2 years ago #
11. handyman - Member

    i am 52 and mine hr max is 203 and that is just before i vomit or fall off the spin bike, i did the test with a personal trainer mate and i can drop it to 165 in about 3 or 4 mins of easier cycling, i think my resting is about 57 or so still got to check that one. I am not a great sprinter but can ride all day at a steady pace

    Posted 2 years ago #
12. tangent - Member

    kids just say no to the EPO...n' take it eze eh?

    Posted 2 years ago #
13. Ti29er - Member

    My rest HR was, at its lowest, last summer, taken at about 11pm, almost asleep (!) and 38bpm.

    Posted 2 years ago #
14. dreednya - Member

    I'm 46 and manage to hit 191 on every ride near enough - don't like going for too long at that rate though mid 180s is fine for 5-10 minutes! So yeah - forget the 220-age crap.

    Posted 2 years ago #
15. nickc - Member

    Comparing HR is a waste of time. Everyone is different

    Posted 2 years ago #
16. flap_jack - Member

    I noted last year that on the tour most riders no longer bother with the HRM chest straps. Power metering is where it's at.

    Posted 2 years ago #
17. Joxster - Member

    My max HR was 229 and my resting was 27, I can still hold 215 for 1min 30 and I'm within spitting distance of 40.

    If I used a power meter or heart rate monitor when racing I would keep it out of my way as they're a distraction, that's why most of the peleton don't bother with them.

    Posted 2 years ago #
18. The DBF - Member

    163 is the highest I've ever got, am I going to die

    Posted 2 years ago #
19. crazy-legs - Member

    220 - age is a formula that gyms used to use because, although it's not scientific in any way, it happens to be reasonable accurate for the type of fat people who go to gyms for the first 3 weeks of January and it gives them something to aim for/have an interest in.
    As mentioned above, the only way you will get anything meaningful out of a HRM is to have a max HR test done, preferably in controlled conditions (KingCycle test, bleep test etc); max HR will be different for running and cycling.

    Highest I ever saw mine was 206 in a KingCycle test (few years ago that!) but it used to go above 200 occasionally in road races. Max and min aren't really worth a lot either, it's pointless comparing it with other people. About the only true indication of fitness is recovery rate.

    Posted 2 years ago #
20. DarkIgor - Member

    Thanks for all the advice. I think it confirms what I already thought, I've been under training. If I use my calculated heart rate as a guide then the 70-80% just felt too easy.

    I think I'll adjust all my target zones up to match the 200 I see on the HRM.

    I just find that having somthing to concentrate on (trying to keep in a zone) passes the time. Let's face it turbo trainers are mind numbingly boring which is why I've been using the dvds with the workouts.

    Posted 2 years ago #
21. nicks - Member

    im 22 and see well over 190bpm quite often during sprints etc

    Posted 2 years ago #
22. RepacK - Member

    flapjack is right - if you really want to know where your at its your power you need to be measuring. HR is just a reaction to an input & typically lags about 90 seconds behind your effort.

    Posted 2 years ago #
23. fontmoss - Member

    pretty sure 220- wasn't conceived by gyms but i think it is applied to an untrained heart, can't remember details but it's related to starlings law and how much blood the heart can pump before it stops filling adequately (ie is based on science and not made up)

    Posted 2 years ago #
24. stever - Member

    Tediously, mine's about 220 minus my age and has been dropping in the 15 years or so I've kept a loose eye on it. I used a HR monitor for a bit, but it's really not me. I go for fun mostly and train by feel when I'm taking it more seriously.

    Posted 2 years ago #
25. Ti29er - Member

    Which gyms devised this "non-scientific" method I wonder?
    As my elderly aunt would say, "Poppy Cock young man"!

    What's the betting it was a test on many subjects, maybe even during the Nazi period (a lot of this type of research was carried out in that period and it's not PC to credit any findings, as you might appreciate) , to asses the "average" man (even if he was blonde and German!)?

    I do know that you can reach a higher HR running or say, XC skiing than you can sitting on a bike.
    Personally, I've not bothered in 18 months* or more as I know what's going on and how hard I'm trying and it's a distraction.

    *turbo and spin training exercises are an exception to this.

    Posted 2 years ago #
26. jond - Member

    >Which gyms devised this "non-scientific" method I wonder?

    They didn't - see halfway down the page for where it came from (assuming some degree of accuracy of course..)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate

    Posted 2 years ago #
27. stuartie_c - Member

    Here's a trace of mine on an intervals session on my 42nd birthday:

    

    It peaks at 194 and I'm managing to sustain that for a couple of minutes. Very hard work, but I suspect not my maximum. 195 is the highest number I've seen on the HRM, but I don't really know what my max is.

    Posted 2 years ago #
28. Ti29er - Member

    Miguel Indurain, a Spanish cyclist and five time Tour de France winner, had a resting heart rate of 28 beats per minute, one of the lowest ever recorded in a healthy human

    Joxster:
    

    My max HR was 229 and my resting was 27

    (Didn't find any date other than some research in the 1970's based on other studies. Am I missing something?)

    Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.